The statements in this section merely provide background information related to the present disclosure and may not constitute prior art.
In the marketplace today, many hot and cold beverages are served on a daily basis in disposable cups, many with disposable lids and some without lids. The lid acts as a sealer, attempting to ensure that the beverage stays within the cup, thus preventing excessive spillage of the beverage. Many disposable lid designs include a small sip hole to facilitate the drinking of a beverage without removing the lid, thereby maintaining the seal between the cup and lid.
Consumers often purchase a beverage and then walk or drive to another distant location while enjoying the beverage. Despite the care and consideration when consuming the drink, unexpected jostling and/or shaking often occur, resulting in splashing of the fluid from the cup. In addition, it is a common occurrence for the cup to be accidentally tipped over and/or turned on its side, causing spilling of fluid from the cup. The previous scenarios are accentuated in the case of a full cup, wherein even slight sloshing back and forth of the beverage results in the hot or cold beverage splashing out of the sip hole, possibly causing a serious burn to the consumer. When the consumer is driving in a vehicle, a small splash of a hot beverage may cause a serious accident, a burn to the consumer, a stain to the consumer's clothing, or a stain in the upholstery of the vehicle.
Even in the best of situations where the consumer is sitting down and/or in a stationary position to enjoy the beverage, it is a commonplace experience for an unexpected situation to occur, which results in the beverage cup tipping over and/or being turned on its side and creating a virtually instantaneous spilling of fluid from the cup. Even the fastest reflexive responses are seldom fast enough to catch or capture the tipped over cup in time to prevent spillage.
These previous scenarios are compounded exponentially when there is no lid to prevent splashing or spilling of the liquid. With the increase of the pace of contemporary lifestyles, the “to-go” mentality has necessarily become commonplace. As a result, drive-through food and, more importantly for the purpose of this present disclosure, drive-through beverage services are now an integral part of life.
There is a real and present need for a device or vessel that will enable the safe consumption of hot beverages, both during transit and/or stationary scenarios, while virtually eliminating splashing of fluid resulting from typical and conventional usage. In addition, there is a real and present need for a device or vessel that delays egress of the flow through the sip hole long enough to enable the consumer to reflexively respond fast enough to capture and/or catch the cup and correct its orientation with little or no spillage.
A significant amount of litigation, with judgment awards ranging into the millions of dollars for legal fees and settlements, has resulted from personal burn injuries caused by hot beverage spillage. Moreover, liability insurance costs for food and beverage vendors, as well as across the board increases in insurance premiums, have become a consequential reality.
Considering there are billions of to-go beverage containers sold each year, a number which is steadily increasing annually, burn and/or spillage exposure is obviously quite significant. In spite of the splash and spill issues related to hot beverages, consumers desire hotter beverages rather than less warm service temperatures. Vendors are pressured to provide consumers with very hot beverages, risking further exposure to splash and spill and burn incidents.
Traditional beverage containers provide little or no insulation value resulting in loss of temperature of the beverage before the beverage has been consumed, resulting in consumer displeasure with the drinking experience.
Many to-go containers attempt to address the insulation loss by using two cups, one nested down inside the other. Another extra insulation method is to employ various external sleeves on the outside of the cup. Both of these methods and variations of them may improve relative heat loss of the beverage through the cup, but do not address any heat loss through the lid. Therefore, loose disc-like products attempt to provide a secondary thermal barrier layer above the fluid and then additionally attempt to improve the efficiency of the secondary thermal barrier by sealing the passage holes with a film of surface tension fluid.
There is a real and present need for a device or vessel that will enable the safe consumption of hot beverages while at the same time maintaining a relatively elevated temperature of the beverage and minimizing heat loss through the lid.
Additionally, when spilled, the vast majority of hot beverages, most notably coffee and hot chocolate, can and do cause stains in clothing, automotive interiors, upholstery, carpet, et cetera, that, unless immediately and aggressively attended to, cannot typically be removed.
One attempt to address these problems is the Traveler Plus™ lid made by Solo. The Traveler Plus™ lid provides a user-initiated, separately attached sip hole cover under the lid to close the sip hole when the user is not drinking the beverage. The cover includes a latch that extends through a slot in the lid and, when pushed or pulled by a finger of the user, the cover swivels away from or toward the sip hole to open and close the sip hole.
Despite some apparent advantages, the Traveler Plus™ lid retains several disadvantages. Most notably the location of the latch is such that many users have difficulty holding the cup and accessing the latch with one hand. As a practical matter, most users find it necessary to hold the cup in one hand and open or close the latch with the other hand. In addition, lid products similar to the Traveler Plus™ require the consumer's head to tilt backward more and more as the cup approaches the final sips, resulting in a line of sight impediment, which is a driving safety hazard to those who enjoy their drink on the go.
Beverage drinkers often desire to drink beverages contained in a disposable cup while driving or holding another item in the other hand. Therefore, users often experience difficulties while drinking through the lid because of the dangerous and/or inconvenient use of both hands often required by the Traveler Plus™ lid and other similar products.
Therefore, there is a real and present need for a device or vessel that will prevent the splash of fluid through a sip hole of lids while holding the cup with a single hand. In addition, there is a real and present need for a device or vessel that allows the consumer to drink from the cup safely without requiring the consumer's head to tilt backward, as the cup approaches the final sips, and does not result in a line of sight impediment.
Furthermore, lids with complicated and complex lid designs, such as the Traveler Plus™ lid, are more difficult to nest and thus more expensive to distribute on a commercial scale. Because of the potential fallbacks of using a more complex disposable lid, many beverage retailers continue to use stackable lids with an uncovered sip hole.
The market is full of additional lid designs that attempt to address potential splash and spill issues related to consumer's handling beverages of one kind or another in one environment or another. Literally, billions and billions of lids each year are served to paying customers to cover a beverage.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,589,569 introduces a drink-through lid with a preformed opening for drinking, which is elevated above the rim of the beverage container. Even though this design prevents some of the spillage due to tilting and jarring, it still allows the beverage to splash on the consumer or the consumer's clothing, car, or other property. One disadvantage of the '569 patent is that hot liquid splashing out of the container can be an inconvenience as well as a safety hazard, causing burns, distractions, and stains. Another disadvantage of the '569 patent is that it provides no spill resistance when the cup is tilted or turned on its side. Another disadvantage of the '569 patent is that it does not provide any extra insulation value. Another disadvantage of the '569 patent is that relative heat loss is accelerated via the chimney effect through the elevated sip hole location. Another disadvantage of the '569 patent is that there is little or no splash resistance provided during the sipping action, should unexpected jostling or shaking occur.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,782,975 introduces an inner lid component that cooperates with the outer lid to provide a normally closed valve. The valve is only open via externally applied lip pressure. Disadvantages of this design include no improved thermal barrier. Another disadvantage of the '975 patent is that the flexibility required by the two cooperating components requires expensive materials, which make this product impractical for a one-time disposable product use market.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,143,248 introduces a complete inner lid layer cooperating with the outer lid. The inner layer can be rotated relative to the outer layer to close the sip hole. The '248 patent claims that, by varying the amount the sip hole is closed, one can vary the cool down rate of the beverage. One disadvantage of the '248 patent is that fluid is prevented from entering between the two lid layers and only passes directly through the sip hole. Another disadvantage of the '248 patent is that when the sip hole is open for drinking, no splash or spill resistance is provided.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,540,350 introduces a pair of disc lid layers that create a baffle fluid flow path. The lower lid layer has a series of holes while the upper lid layer allows fluid to pass around the outer perimeter. The '350 patent is a loose product that can be placed in a beverage vessel and used with a traditional lid. One disadvantage of the '248 patent is that the two-piece construction is a separate component for the consumer to place in a cup, which allows the opportunity for the component to be installed incorrectly or not at all. Another disadvantage of the '350 patent is that the loose component assembly can easily be tilted sideways in the cup during drinking and void the features it is claiming to provide.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,979,689 and 6,199,711 are variations on the theme of the '350 patent and add other improvements upon the '350 patent, such as resolving the loose disadvantage by making either the outer lid layer or the inner lid layer wrap around and attach to the cup lip. This improvement is further complicated by a very complicated series of flaps that is claimed to be normally closed and only activated by a rotatable layer. One disadvantage of the '711 patent is that, in addition to the cost of complexity, the material cost for a resilient flap that actually remains normally closed makes this product impractically expensive for the single use disposable marketplace.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,305,571 introduces an inner lid layer with some specifically located holes, allowing fluid to pass into a chamber directly under the sip hole and then returning the excess fluid down a ramp to a drain hole. The '571 patent claims to be “splashless;” however, the inner lid layer fastens to the outer lid layer at a central point of contact, which leaves the perimeter of the inner lid layer to be unconstrained. This unconstrained condition allows for lid component mismatch due to typical manufacturing and/or assembly tolerances, resulting is leakage around the perimeter of the inner lid layer, resulting in not-so-splashless performance. Another disadvantage of the '571 patent is that the lids are virtually unstackable against each other, resulting is increased storage space required by vendors and increased shipping costs due to less lids per unit box volume.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,311,863 introduces an aroma baffle that claims to enhance the beverage drinking experience. Whether this claim is true, disadvantages of the '863 patent obviate any potential aroma advantage. One disadvantage of the '863 patent is that the inner lid layer and downward extending baffle plate are not stackable, requiring excessive shipping and storage costs to the vendors. Another disadvantage of the '863 patent is that the cost of the excessively large downward extending baffle is impractical for a one-use disposable component. Another disadvantage of the '863 patent is that it provides little or no splash or spill resistance.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,578,726 claims a one or two-piece construction, albeit they do not disclose a method or drawing of a one-piece construction. The '726 patent claims that the lower lid portion may be used singularly in some applications without the second portion. One disadvantage to the '726 patent is that the aroma vents allow fluid to be resident and/or pool directly in the line of sight with the aroma exit hole, which does not provide splash or spill resistance. This lack of splash resistance is especially notable when the single portion is used by itself. Another disadvantage of the '726 patent is that the secondary lid portion is applied and snapped onto the inner lid portion from the outside of the lid, which allows it to pop off unexpectedly, not be assembled properly, or leak around the perimeter of the secondary portion.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,679,397 introduces a tethered closure tab that can seal the sip hole during transport. One disadvantage of the '397 patent is that the sip hole must be opened to sip, during which time there is no splash or spill resistance. Another disadvantage of the '397 patent is that the consumer must re-install the closure tab between sips to gain the advantage of the closure tab, which is a two-hand function and awkward for many consumer drinking experiences, resulting is consumers not re-installing the closure tab. Another disadvantage of the '397 patent is that it is not stackable, resulting in excessive vendor cost for storage and shipping. Another disadvantage of the '397 patent is that the tethered tab is dangling about the consumer, detracting from the beverage drinking experience.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,732,875 introduces a two-piece lid with the inner lid layer rotatable with respect to the outer lid layer via a finger tab or similar means. One disadvantage of the '875 patent is that the sip hole must be opened and closed between sips to take advantage of the splash resistant feature. Another disadvantage of the '875 patent is that for many people the sliding of the tab is a two-hand operation and awkward in many beverage drinking situations. Another disadvantage of the '875 patent is that, during sipping, the open sip hole exposes the consumer to splash and spill situations.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,063,224 introduces a lid with a tab that tilts back and secures in place. One disadvantage of the '224 patent is that during sipping the sip hole is open, exposing the consumer to spill and splash situations. Another disadvantage of the '224 patent is that once the tab has been tilted back and secured, no additional splash or spill resistance is provided to the consumer.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,086,549 introduces a reusable two-piece lid construction more specifically for spray paint cans used with air spray paint guns. A significant disadvantage of the '549 patent is that any variation on the theme is excessively expensive for any application in the disposable beverage drink market.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,100,790 introduces a single-piece lid with baffle openings that allow fluid to pass from the container into a reservoir on the other side of the lid. One disadvantage of the '790 patent is that fluid pooled in the reservoir is subject to splash and spill situations. Another disadvantage of the '790 patent is that fluid subjected to shaking and/or jostling has a clear line of sight into the reservoir from the container below, and there is no additional baffling or diverter means in the reservoir to absorb or dissipate fluid flow forces as they pass through the baffle openings and into the reservoir.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,131,551 and 7,134,566 are variations on the theme of the U.S. Pat. No. 6,679,397 tethered tab closures. One disadvantage of the '551 and '566 patents is that the sip hole must be opened to sip, during which time there is no splash or spill resistance. Another disadvantage of the '551 and '566 patents is that the consumer must re-install the closure tab between sips to gain the advantage of the closure tab, which is a two-hand function, and awkward for many consumer drinking experiences, resulting is consumers not re-installing the closure tab. Another disadvantage of the '551 and '566 patents is that it is not stackable, resulting in excessive vendor cost for storage and shipping. Another disadvantage of the '551 and '566 patents is that the tethered tab is dangling about the consumer, detracting from the beverage drinking experience.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,156,251 is a variation on the theme of U.S. Pat. No. 6,732,875. One disadvantage of the '251 patent is that the sip hole must be opened and closed between sips to take advantage of the splash resistant feature. Another disadvantage of the '251 patent is that for many people the sliding of the tab is a two-hand operation and awkward in many beverage drinking situations. Another disadvantage of the '251 patent is that, during sipping, the open sip hole exposes the consumer to splash and spill situations.
Another concept was conceived by Dan Roseblade and Ricky Anderson. Their product concept is hereinafter referred to as the “Disc.” One embodiment of the Disc can be used independently in a typical hot beverage cup with a typical hot beverage sipping lid, while a second embodiment of the Disc is installed intermediately between a typical hot beverage cup and a typical hot beverage sipping lid for the purpose of minimizing seepage through the sip hole in the lid.
The Disc is a relatively flat plane device with a series of round holes perforating through the disc to allow passage of fluid from one side to the other. The relatively flat plane surface of the Disc is oriented such that the relatively flat surface is relatively parallel to the surface of the fluid when the cup is upright at rest. Whether the Disc is independent or installed intermediately into a lid, the relatively flat surface of the Disc maintains a relatively parallel orientation with the surface fluid when the cup is upright at rest.
One disadvantage of the Disc is that the independent embodiment allows the device to float on the fluid and/or remain loose in the cup, which allows differential orientation of the passage holes relative to the sip hole. The series of passage holes are allowed to be far enough away from the sip hole that line of sight orientation is possible with the sip hole, such that some incidental splash is possible.
Another disadvantage of the Disc is that the numerous series of holes provides a line of sight orientation with the sip hole at most every 360 degree orientation rotation of the Disc relative to the sip hole, such that some incidental splash is possible. This disadvantage is not overcome when the Disc is installed intermediately into a lid, due to the numerous series locations of the passage holes still providing a line of sight orientation with the sip hole regardless of the rotational orientation of the Disc relative to the sip hole.
Another disadvantage of the Disc is that the holes are preferred round in shape, which allows for the maximum volume of fluid to pass through relative to the circumference of the hole, allowing incidental splash to be at its maximum potential.
Another disadvantage of the Disc is that the relatively flat plane surface allows fluid to pass through from one side to the other and pool on the top side of the Disc without draining back into the cup, allowing this pooled fluid to rapidly cool down only to be mixed in with warmer fluid from the cup during a subsequent drink, thus minimizing the otherwise beneficial effects of the insulation value of the Disc portion. The Disc claims that surface tension will seal the passage holes and block the chimney effect of heat loss through the passage holes. While this may be true for the holes that have fluid in them, it is not true for the holes that do not have fluid in them. Another disadvantage of the Disc is that there are so many passage holes in the series, that it is virtually impossible for every hole to have fluid passing through it to form a surface tension thermal barrier unless the cup is turned upside down.
Another disadvantage of the Disc is that while some holes may form a thermal barrier, due to surface tension, the remainder of the unsealed holes allows for a rapid heat release accelerating through the open holes to balance thermal exchange, minimizing the benefit of the thermal barrier formed by the Disc.
Another disadvantage of the independent Disc embodiment is that it must be handled by the customer at the point of purchase and can be installed improperly or not installed at all, obviating any potential benefit.
Another disadvantage of the installed intermediate Disc in a lid is that the Disc can be easily removed; it can become dislodged during handling and/or transport, obviating any potential benefit.
Another disadvantage of the installed intermediate Disc in a lid is that lids of this design are not easily stackable, requiring the vendor to make special handling considerations, larger volume storage considerations, and less units per shipping box considerations.
Another disadvantage of the Disc is that during sipping, excessive line of sight is provided between the passage holes and the sip hole, during which time little or no spill or splash resistance is provided should any incidental jostling or shaking occur unexpectedly.
Another disadvantage of the Disc is that while the device does provide some benefit to minimize incidental splash of fluid through the sip hole when the cup is shaken or jostled, it provides little or no spill resistance when the cup is tipped and/or turned on its side.
Henceforth, there is a real and present need for a device or vessel that will prevent beverage splashing and/or spilling from disposable cup and lid combinations, while still allowing beverage retailers to retain the economical incentives associated with the use of more conventional stackable disposable lid designs.
When liquids, soups, and other similar foods are heated and/or re-heated in a microwave oven, there is a common experience by consumers that the lid pops off the container during heating and results in quite a mess to clean up in the oven. One reason for the lids popping off is the result of bits of food acting as projectiles that knock the lid off the container. Peas and beans often explode in response to microwave exposure, sending small food projectiles that impact against the inside the lid and knocking it loose.
Therefore, there is a real and present need for a lid device that will absorb and/or deflect the forces of the exploding food projectiles so that said forces are abated before they can dislodge the lid.
During extreme fluid jostling and/or violent shaking of a beverage container full of fluid, the fluid sets up a wave-like motion inside the container and slams against the inside of the lid. In many instances, the force of the wave motion is sufficient to dislodge the lid, resulting in a complete spill.
Therefore, there is a real and present need for a lid device that will absorb and/or deflect the forces of fluid wave motion inside the container to prevent said forces from acting directly upon the lid in such a way that it can become dislodged as a result of the fluid wave forces.
The subject invention satisfies all of the articulated real and present needs by providing a splash and spill resistant insulating lid design. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that conventional cup and lid combinations may be utilized in the marketplace that incorporate one or more of the various features of the subject invention.